New Year’s Answers!

Happy New Year!

Friday’s questions are here.  The answers follow the Honor Roll.

For those of you on the fence about First Run, it’s only a 5K!  It’ll be over before you  notice the cold!  That being said, if you never again hear from Karen Allen (honor roll regular who I think will be there) or me, send a St. Bernard.  (Don’t laugh, I saw it work in Bugs Bunny.)

Bugs Bunny Bernard

Honor Roll

Answers

Question 1

Regular readers know that I’m obsessed with fond of “tech competence.”  Today, one of the final days of 2017, a search on “tech competence” produces theses posts.

Harken, for a moment, back to the final days of 1999.  At the time, “tech competence” was, in a way, very much in the news.  What was the name given to the tech issue that many expected to cause widespread calamity as soon as ’99 ended?

The Y2K Bug

Y2K.jpg

Question 2

In ’99, a TV show that focused on the law firm Cage & Fish won the Primetime Emmy for Outstanding Comedy.  The main character joined the firm after leaving her previous job as a result of being the victim of sexual harassment.  On her first day at the new job, she was stunned to learn that her ex worked at the firm too.

In a poll conducted by the ABA in 2010, the main character was named one of the top 25 “greatest fictional lawyers not named Atticus Finch,” and was the highest-ranked female lawyer on the list.

Name her.

Ally McBeal (played by Calista Flockhart)

Ally McBeal.jpg

Question 3

In a previous quiz, I included a question on Jay-Z’s 99 Problems.  Believe it or not, and having mentioned The Beatles, in 2004, Danger Mouse released The Grey Album.  It was a mashup of  songs from The Beatles White Album with songs from Jay-Z’s Black Album. Danger Mouse mashed 99 Problems with Helter Skelter.

Helter Skelter reminds me of a real-life attorney who some might say was “ethically challenged.”

Irving Kanarek represented a notorious client in a criminal trial that began in 1971.  The client was charged with conspiracy to commit multiple murders.  During the trial, Kanarek:

  • objected 9 times during the prosecutor’s opening statement;
  • was found in contempt 4 times;
  • spent 2 nights in jail for contempt;
  • gave a 7 day closing argument; and
  • had the judge tell him he was “totally without scruples, ethics, and professional responsibility.”

Who was Kanarek’s notorious client?

Charles Manson

Question 4

On behalf of Client, Attorney sent a letter to Potential Defendant.   Attorney received a response that included the following statements:

I was dreamin’ when I wrote this
So sue me if I go too fast
But life is just a party
And parties weren’t meant to last

Who is Potential Defendant, and what does Potential Defendant intend to do this weekend?

Prince, Party Like it’s 1999 (lyrics are from the song)

prince

Question 5

One of 1999’s most notable events was a 5-week trial in which a lawyer was charged with perjury and obstruction of justice.  The lawyer was acquitted of both charges.  The vote on the perjury charge was 55-45.  The vote on the obstruction charge was 50-50.

Name the lawyer.

Bonus: name the judge who presided over the trial.

Lawyer:  President Bill Clinton

Presiding Judge:  Chief Justice William Rehnquist

 

Five for Friday #99

Welcome to #99!

Before I get down to business, let’s talk about the weather.   Yes, it’s cold.  But, don’t worry: at least it’s a dry cold.

Now, let’s talk about 99.

Regular readers might expect me to use this space to wax poetic about Prince.

Wrong.

Surely, by now you know that I’m incapable of waxing poetic about anything.  And stop calling me Shirley.  Further, I did a Prince-themed quiz upon his untimely passing.

Instead, I’m going to take the easy way out, similar to what I did this week with my regular blog posts.  I’m going to use the fact that this column coincides with the year’s end to recap 2017’s most-read #fiveforfriday quizzes.

In reverse order:

Stones

#3:  Beatles v. Stones.  Last spring marked the 50th anniversary of the U.S. release of Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band.  In the days leading up to the anniversary, several readers asked if I planned to use the #fiveforfriday column to honor The Beatles and the album.   Ummm, no.  Instead, I used the occasion to honor The World’s Greatest Rock & Roll Band:  The Rolling Stones.  Pandemonium ensued, with chronic cases of Beatle-mania causing otherwise competent members of this bar to cite the column as proof that I should be disbarred.  The quiz is here, the answers here.

Swift

#2: Bar Counsel is a Swiftie The 2nd most-read #fiveforfriday quiz in 2017 was my confession to being a Taylor Swift fan. (it also included an ode to Tom Petty).  If being a Swiftie is a crime, I have three words for you:  guilty as charged!  The post generated a significant number of responses.  Some were Mean, leading me to conclude that some of my readers . . . well, let’s just say that We Will Never Ever Get Back Together.  But, I didn’t let the Bad Blood bother me, telling myself “Self, just Shake It Off.”  Not to mention, most responses were positive, with readers recognizing that the confession demonstrated my Style.  Or maybe they were just trying to curry favor in case their names ever end up in the Blank Space on a disciplinary complaint that lands on my desk.  The quiz is here, the answers here.

MY COUSIN VINNY, Mitchell Whitfield (far left), Ralph Macchio (second from left), Joe Pesci (third f

#1: My Cousin Vinny.   If there’s one thing that Vermont lawyers know about cross-examining witnesses, it’s that a jury simply cannot trust someone who claims to have cooked grits in 5 minutes when it takes the entire grit-eating world 20!  What, were those magic grits?? Oh, and Jerry Gallo? He’s dead!   The My Cousin Vinny-themed quiz got over 400 clicks on the weekend it was posted.  Making it, by far, the most read of the 2017 #fiveforfriday quizzes. Here’s to Positraction, Metallic Mint Green, and Utes! The quiz is here, the answers here.

Thanks for reading and participating!

Onto the 99th quiz!

Rules:

  • None. You’re not even required to answer every question. And you don’t need to go 5 for 5 to make the honor roll!
  • Team entries welcome.  (think: “wisdom of crowds”)
  • Creative team names encouraged & appreciated.
  • Please consider sharing the quiz with friends & colleagues, even non-lawyers!
  • social media hashtag is #fiveforfriday
  • E-mail entries to michael.kennedy@vermont.gov
  • I’ll post the answers sometime early next week
  • REMEMBER:  Folks – in the spirit of celebrating a new year, these questions are FOR FUN!

Question 1

Regular readers know that I’m obsessed with fond of “tech competence.”  Today, one of the final days of 2017, a search on “tech competence” produces theses posts.

Harken, for a moment, back to the final days of 1999.  At the time, “tech competence” was, in a way, very much in the news.  What was the name given to the tech issue that many expected to cause widespread calamity as soon as ’99 ended?

Question 2

In ’99, a TV show that focused on the law firm Cage & Fish won the Primetime Emmy for Outstanding Comedy.  The main character joined the firm after leaving her previous job as a result of being the victim of sexual harassment.  On her first day at the new job, she was stunned to learn that her ex worked at the firm too.

In a poll conducted by the ABA in 2010, the main character was named one of the top 25 “greatest fictional lawyers not named Atticus Finch,” and was the highest-ranked female lawyer on the list.

Name her.

Question 3

In a previous quiz, I included a question on Jay-Z’s 99 Problems.  Believe it or not, and having mentioned The Beatles, in 2004, Danger Mouse released The Grey Album.  It was a mashup of  songs from The Beatles White Album with songs from Jay-Z’s Black Album. Danger Mouse mashed 99 Problems with Helter Skelter.

Helter Skelter reminds me of a real-life attorney who some might say was “ethically challenged.”

Irving Kanarek represented a notorious client in a criminal trial that began in 1971.  The client was charged with conspiracy to commit multiple murders.  During the trial, Kanarek:

  • objected 9 times during the prosecutor’s opening statement;
  • was found in contempt 4 times;
  • spent 2 nights in jail for contempt;
  • gave a 7 day closing argument; and
  • had the judge tell him he was “totally without scruples, ethics, and professional responsibility.”

Who was Kanarek’s notorious client?

Question 4

On behalf of Client, Attorney sent a letter to Potential Defendant.   Attorney received a response that included the following statements:

I was dreamin’ when I wrote this
So sue me if I go too fast
But life is just a party
And parties weren’t meant to last

Who is Potential Defendant, and what does Potential Defendant intend to do this weekend?

Question 5

One of 1999’s most notable events was a 5-week trial in which a lawyer was charged with perjury and obstruction of justice.  The lawyer was acquitted of both charges.  The vote on the perjury charge was 55-45.  The vote on the obstruction charge was 50-50.

Name the lawyer.

Bonus: name the judge who presided over the trial.

Finally, as a blogger who often writes about the duty of competence, it’d be incompetent of me to post a 99-themed blog without mentioning one of the most gloriously incompetent tv characters of all time, Maxwell Smart, and his partner, Agent 99.

Smart & 99.jpg

 

Five For Friday #15

If you haven’t already, please read yesterday’s post on mental health & substance abuse.  It’s HERE.  The post references a study released last month by the ABA and the Hazeldon Betty Ford Clinic.  The study is a bit “clinical.”  For an easier read, check out this article from a recent edition of the New Hampshire Bar News.  The headline says it all.

Special “thank you” to the reader from southeastern Vermont who forwarded the NH article to me yesterday.

As for today, happy birthday Erin Gilmore! Erin was one of the first Five for Friday superstars.  I didn’t meet Erin until after each of us had been admitted to the bar, but it turns out our families go way back. Erin, as they say in the old country, la breith sona duit!

Reminder on the Five For Friday rules:

  • email your answers to michael.kennedy@vermont.gov
  • you can do whatever research you want for questions 1-4.  Question 5 is closed book, closed note, no search engine, no phone-a-friend.
  • please forward this post to colleagues & co-workers and ask them to consider entering
  • for those of you still too shy to enter, please take a look at this post.

Question 1

Yesterday, a lawyer and I discussed whether funds that are in the lawyer’s possession are being held “in connection with a representation.”  It is most likely, then, that the lawyer called me to ask whether:

  • A.   the trust accounting rules apply
  • B.   she may disburse the funds in reliance upon a deposit that has not cleared & does not yet constitute “collected funds”
  • C.   the funds are subject to trustee process
  • D.   “referral fees” are allowed in Vermont

Question 2

By rule, a lawyer currently serving as a public employee may not negotiate for private employment with any person who is involved as a party or an attorney for a party in a matter in which the lawyer is participating personally & substantially.

There is an exception.  It is for a lawyer who is serving as a ___________.

Fill in the blank. Hint: it’s not just one word.

Question 3

Lawyer is representing Business Owner in a civil suit filed by Smith.

You’re bar counsel for a day.  Lawyer calls and asks “is it okay if I tell Employee of Business Owner to refrain from voluntarily giving information to Smith’s attorney?”

What say ye?

  • A.   that’s not a violation of Vermont’s rules
  • B.   it’s okay since it’s civil case. It wouldn’t be okay if you were representing Business Owner in a criminal case.
  • C.   it’d be okay if you were defending Business Owner against criminal charges, but it’s not okay in a civil case.
  • D.  the only advice you can give to Employee is the advice to seek counsel

Question 4

This happened on Wednesday.

Attorney called me with an inquiry. I listened. Then, I responded by saying:

  • “The rule draws a distinction between things like phone calls & real-time communications, and things like letters & emails.  The former are subject to more restrictions than the latter.”

Given that my responses to inquiries are based on the Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct, what was the most likely topic of this inquiry?

Question 5

 

Irving Kanarek represented a notorious client in a criminal trial that began in 1971.  The client was charged with conspiracy to commit multiple murders.  During the trial, Kanarek:

  • objected 9 times during the prosecutor’s opening statement;
  • was found in contempt 4 times;
  • spent 2 nights in jail for contempt;
  • gave a 7 day closing argument; and
  • had the judge tell him he was “totally without scruples, ethics, and professional responsibility.”

Who was Kanarek’s notorious client?